We Left 21 Pages of Feedback

[Sagedurk.7358]

On 2/15/2023 at 11:03 PM, Obtena.7952 said:

There have been instances where Anet didn't implement intended changes based on feedback so, when people say this forum feedback process is just  'posturing' ... that's just not honest and a bad attempt at guilt shaming. Some of the feedback is good and Anet does pay attention to it. The majority of it is not. 

Anet pays attention to the feedback?

 

Then please explain why absolutely none of my feedback, actual feedback, regarding alac willbender was considered. Not even an acknowledgement.

 

Alac willbender has design flaws, yet all they did was bandaid it into dealing damage... I seriously bench more on power alac willbender now than I did on power dps willbender back in July

 

But hey, we are still forced into the Virtues traitline to share alac on hit. We barely have any boons outside of alac, and some traits still don't even interact properly with each other!

 

All we got was some core guardian tweak and virtues not overriding each other.

They could make the build deal 60k/s and I would still say that it's not fixed. Cause it has nothing to do with the damage numbers, it has to do with the design flaws. Yet, absolutely nothing back. Not even an explanation for why they won't 

[Obtena.7952]

5 minutes ago, Sagedurk.7358 said:

Anet pays attention to the feedback?

 

Then please explain why absolutely none of my feedback, actual feedback, regarding alac willbender was considered. Not even an acknowledgement.

Could be lots of reasons. My personal favourite: The game doesn't cater to individuals on how they think it should work. 

Do not think for one second that Anet isn't implementing the game and specs in a way they want it to work, no matter how amazing you think your feedback is. 

Edited February 17, 2023 by Obtena.7952

[Arewn.2368]

On 2/15/2023 at 4:46 PM, Obtena.7952 said:

It's not posturing though ... it's always been this way because there isn't a test server. It's not that they don't listen ... it's that the testing/feedback process requires the changes to be in the game before it makes sense for people to give feedback on the changes. 

Bottomline here is that people put too much value on their feedback prior to being able to actually test the changes. 

No that's exactly the point.

The process isn't some act of nature that Arena Net is forced to abide by.

They themselves set up a process that inherently does not allow them to proactively engage with feedback, then offer players a feedback period they know they can't make use of, then proceed to (surprise surprise) not listen to feedback.

It's not that people are putting too much value on their feedback prior to testing. Players are just working with what Arena Net has provided. Which is a short feedback period prior to implementation with  no opportunity to test.

I agree there's a general tendency for players of any game to over value their own ideas about how the game should work. One of my biggest pet peeves in gaming is when so called "top players" start mistaking their skill at playing the game for skill at designing games.

But that doesn't mean the studio can't also be bad at considering player feedback.

Edited February 17, 2023 by Arewn.2368

[Obtena.7952]

37 minutes ago, Arewn.2368 said:

No that's exactly the point.

The process isn't some act of nature that Arena Net is forced to abide by.

They themselves set up a process that inherently does not allow them to proactively engage with feedback, then offer players a feedback period they know they can't make use of, then proceed to (surprise surprise) not listen to feedback.

That isn't really true. We have seen instances where feedback from patch previews made Anet change their minds on certain changes for the upcoming patch. Also, there is nothing preventing Anet from considering that feedback in future patches either. You shouldn't be imposing your restrictions on how or when Anet uses feedback to judge them. That's unreasonable. 

But hey, if people think Anet is terrible at using player feedback, then those people have the option of NOT giving them feedback. 

Edited February 17, 2023 by Obtena.7952

[Arewn.2368]

2 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

That isn't really true. We have seen instances where feedback from patch previews made Anet change their minds on certain changes. I mean, it's just not honest at this point to say things like :

But that doesn't mean the studio can't also be bad at considering player feedback.

They aren't bad just because people complaint they don't get changes they want from Anet instantly responding to all the feedback they get. That's absurd. Again, that kind of statement ignores the fact that Anet can't cater to everyone's idea of how the game should work. 

Your strawman is what's  absurd. I obviously dont expect them to react immediatly, or to make changes according to everything each random forum goer posts.

But there's plenty of clear examples of obvious problems being pointed out by the community that get implemented anyways. As well as an easily identified flaw in their feedback collection process (short notice, no testing window).

This is the case both recently and in the more distant past.

Occasional instances of listening does not mean there is no problem.

 

Do you know what ESO posted about two weeks ago?

Full patch notes of the balance changes, available live for testing on their Public Test Server, for the patch coming on MARCH 28th.

 

[Obtena.7952]

42 minutes ago, Arewn.2368 said:

Your strawman is what's  absurd. I obviously dont expect them to react immediatly, or to make changes according to everything each random forum goer posts.

But there's plenty of clear examples of obvious problems being pointed out by the community that get implemented anyways. As well as an easily identified flaw in their feedback collection process (short notice, no testing window).

This is the case both recently and in the more distant past.

Occasional instances of listening does not mean there is no problem.

 

Do you know what ESO posted about two weeks ago?

Full patch notes of the balance changes, available live for testing on their Public Test Server, for the patch coming on MARCH 28th.

 

Again ... if you don't think feedback works, don't do it. You don't like the process? Don't participate. I can see examples where it does work because people participate in it. I also think of and understand reasons Anet doesn't act on all the feedback they get. 

If that's not you, that's not a problem. Either you work within the process that exists ... or you don't. I'm sure the game will do just fine without people making 20 pages of 'feedback' because the game doesn't work how they want. 

Edited February 17, 2023 by Obtena.7952

[Acanthus.8120]

3 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Again ... if you don't think feedback works, don't do it. You don't like the process? Don't participate. I can see examples where it does work because people participate in it. I also think of and understand reasons Anet doesn't act on all the feedback they get. 

If that's not you, that's not a problem. Either you work within the process that exists ... or you don't. I'm sure the game will do just fine without people making 20 pages of 'feedback' because the game doesn't work how they want. 

Do you have 12,000 posts of basically just negging people? If people didn't have a way to air out their grievances or get heard, they are more likely to quit. That is not good for the game or for you personally because an online service needs many people to fund it.

Feedback is actually a really important part of quality control and marketing. Quality control is obvious, marketing because you can gauge what your customers want and either amend a product (this is digital, so we can do that), thereby increasing goodwill and likely getting a returning customer, or create a new product to monetize based on an unfulfilled demand (market demand, not literal statements of demand). You especially want feedback from people who spend a lot of time on your product or people with very in-depth knowledge of your product. And funnily, those are often the type of people to go on the forums (usually when they're unhappy though). Is it always unbiased, objective feedback? No. But every person that voices an opinion is probably speaking about an experience thousands of people have had, and that is valuable. You shouldn't be encouraging people to give up and constantly shutting down their feelings. It's unkind, and it doesn't help anybody; not you, not the people you're talking to, and certainly not Anet.

[Obtena.7952]

19 minutes ago, Acanthus.8120 said:

Feedback is actually a really important part of quality control and marketing. Quality control is obvious, marketing because you can gauge what your customers want and either amend a product (this is digital, so we can do that), thereby increasing goodwill and likely getting a returning customer, or create a new product to monetize based on an unfulfilled demand (market demand, not literal statements of demand). You especially want feedback from people who spend a lot of time on your product or people with very in-depth knowledge of your product. And funnily, those are often the type of people to go on the forums (usually when they're unhappy though). Is it always unbiased, objective feedback? No. But every person that voices an opinion is probably speaking about an experience thousands of people have had, and that is valuable.
 

OK I don't disagree with that. 

19 minutes ago, Acanthus.8120 said:

You shouldn't be encouraging people to give up and constantly shutting down their feelings. It's unkind, and it doesn't help anybody; not you, not the people you're talking to, and certainly not Anet.

Um, no. I'm encouraging people to accept the system that is in place because it does work (as opposed to claiming it doesn't work because they don't get things they want). We have examples where Anet has stopped changes because of feedback based EXACTLY on the patch preview.

I mean, if people don't believe this process works and Anet is ignoring their feedback, why do they participate in it?

 

Edited February 18, 2023 by Obtena.7952

[Acanthus.8120]

17 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Um, no. I'm encouraging people to accept the system that is in place because it does work (as opposed to claiming it doesn't work because they don't get things they want). We have examples where Anet has stopped changes because of feedback based EXACTLY on the patch preview.

I mean, if people don't believe this process works and Anet is ignoring their feedback, why do they participate in it?

Because they're frustrated and still care enough about the game to engage. They still want to be heard, and at least receive an acknowledgement. There would be so much less vitriol if there was even vague acknowledgement of their issues (at least in the short term, since it would still require follow-up). Moreover, sometimes getting heard isn't instant. Some classes recently got some much needed love based on feedback given despite historically not being treated with care. Others though, not so much.

Mirage PvP/WvW players have been upset about the single dodge nerf since it was implemented, and Vindicator getting 2 dodges when it was directly designed to have 1 amplified their bitterness. There has been a very long, very sustained negative reaction about it by people very dedicated to playing the game on mesmers. I do not think they should stop giving feedback. They paid for a particular experience, and that experience was drastically altered in a way that negatively affects them. You can argue balance does that in general, but they are fundamentally the only class to have been nerfed in a way that an exception was made in the basic rules of the game to facilitate. I would be upset too. And they've basically heard nothing about their feedback. They absolutely would be justified to say as much, but telling them to stop engaging in the process is tantamount to telling them to stop caring even if that isn't your intent.

[Ovark.2514]

I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels this way.

[Obtena.7952]

51 minutes ago, Acanthus.8120 said:

Because they're frustrated and still care enough about the game to engage. They still want to be heard, and at least receive an acknowledgement.

Right ... so the process DOES work then and no one should pretend like Anet is ignoring their feedback if they still genuinely engage in it. If people want acknowledgement from Anet about why they are making these changes, they just need to read patch notes. It's a worthless exercise for Anet to tell people that, based on COMMON SENSE, they can't implement everything people want.  

I mean, again, you can't play both sides of field here. If you contribute and give good feedback, that's the best you can do. When people overstep and claim Anet is ignoring them when they do that, they are just defeating the purpose of the very system they have to rely upon to get changes they want. 

I think the main problem here is that people convinced themselves that this preview is an opportunity to get Anet to make changes they want. That's a pretty unrealistic expectation considering it's a week prior to the release. We see what kinds of actions Anet can take on these preview feedbacks ... it's certainly nothing of the scale that most people expect them to. #unreasonableexpecations

Edited February 18, 2023 by Obtena.7952

[Obtena.7952]

double post

Edited February 18, 2023 by Obtena.7952

[Acanthus.8120]

26 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Right ... so the process DOES work then and no one should pretend like Anet is ignoring their feedback if they still genuinely engage in it.

That's a very cherry-picked or straw-manned interpretation of what I was trying to get across, so I'm going to check out here.

[Ruisenior.6342]

16 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Could be lots of reasons. My personal favourite: The game doesn't cater to individuals on how they think it should work. 

Do not think for one second that Anet isn't implementing the game and specs in a way they want it to work, no matter how amazing you think your feedback is. 

Don't worry obtena, soon you will be the only 1 left here

[shrew.3059]

On 2/18/2023 at 1:09 AM, Acanthus.8120 said:

Do you have 12,000 posts of basically just negging people? If people didn't have a way to air out their grievances or get heard, they are more likely to quit.

 

For every grievance you have, there is likely another grievance that would be created by just doing exactly what you think needs to be done. That doesn't make you wrong, it just makes feedbacj tricky.

While customer feedback is important, running design like an informal democracy of the loudest aggrieved forum member is not a good strategy. No successful company is run like this. That's not how feedback works, unless you're comfortable with being held personally accountable if your suggestion fails spectacularly?

[Moradorin.6217]

On 2/17/2023 at 6:28 PM, Obtena.7952 said:

Right ... so the process DOES work then and no one should pretend like Anet is ignoring their feedback if they still genuinely engage in it. If people want acknowledgement from Anet about why they are making these changes, they just need to read patch notes. It's a worthless exercise for Anet to tell people that, based on COMMON SENSE, they can't implement everything people want.  

I mean, again, you can't play both sides of field here. If you contribute and give good feedback, that's the best you can do. When people overstep and claim Anet is ignoring them when they do that, they are just defeating the purpose of the very system they have to rely upon to get changes they want. 

I think the main problem here is that people convinced themselves that this preview is an opportunity to get Anet to make changes they want. That's a pretty unrealistic expectation considering it's a week prior to the release. We see what kinds of actions Anet can take on these preview feedbacks ... it's certainly nothing of the scale that most people expect them to. #unreasonableexpecations

That's interesting. So then if they addressed everything anyone needs to know in the patch notes. Why did they still not mention Mirage again or state why they have not yet decided to give it back a 2nd dodge in wvw/pvp after CMC having mentioned in the stream last Oct that "Mirage's other dodge was on the table" during the stream in which they announced they decided to go ahead and give Vindicator a 2nd dodge in all 3 game modes? Mind you Vind. was designed to function with only one dodge unlike Mirage which was intended by design to have 2 dodges.

 

I dont recall them redressing this issue at all nor have they explained the direction they have taken thus far with Mirage other than to troll the community with the comment in that official stream.

Edited February 19, 2023 by Moradorin.6217

[Obtena.7952]

9 minutes ago, Moradorin.6217 said:

That's interesting. So then if they addressed everything anyone needs to know in the patch notes. Why did they still not mention Mirage again or state why they have not yet decided to give it back a 2nd dodge in wvw/pvp after CMC having mentioned in the stream last Oct that "Mirage's other dodge was on the table" during the stream in which they announced they decided to go ahead and give Vindicator a 2nd dodge in all 3 game modes? Mind you Vind. was designed to function with only one dodge unlike Mirage which was intended by design to have 2 dodges.

 

I dont recall them redressing this issue at all nor have they explained the direction they have taken thus far with Mirage other than to troll the community with the comment in that official stream.

It's simply unreasonable to believe Anet is going to directly address every single feedback people give. It shouldn't really be 'interesting' ... it should be common sense. I don't even get your statement here. Why would you think Anet addresses everything anyone needs to know in patch notes? What makes you conclude their reasoning for maintaining Mirage single dodge is one of those things?

Edited February 19, 2023 by Obtena.7952

[Moradorin.6217]

Just now, Obtena.7952 said:

It's simply unreasonable to believe Anet is going to directly address every single feedback people give. 

its been the main and most active topic in the Mesmer forum for a long time and that is not the first thread about it either. They seemed aware enough of it as a topic when they decided to give a 2nd dodge to Vindicator (eod so $ I guess) but then they didnt do anything for Mirage or say why in the last many patches.

 

Mind you the Mirage one dodge issue was created by the same balance team back 3 years ago as a quick fix type balance solution for Mirage long long ago and many nerfs ago too for that matter. Yet you don't feel an objective person would feel the need to mention it again?

 

I feel very much like the balance team shows a significant lack of integrity by avoiding this topic after having teasted the exact topic like 3-4 balance patches ago.

 

I feel it implies they only mentioned it because they knew it would come up when they wanted to give Vindicator a 2nd dodge but never intended to do anything about it and, therefore, wish to avoid the topic which is why I keep saying I feel like they are being unprofessional and lack integrity and or competence.

[Obtena.7952]

1 minute ago, Moradorin.6217 said:

its been the main and most active topic in the Mesmer forum for a long time and that is not the first thread about it either. 

OK ... that doesn't really matter. I get you want to have a couple rounds in the ring with Anet directly about this subject but ... why would they talk about that in a patch note where there isn't any changes for it? That doesn't make sense. 

Edited February 19, 2023 by Obtena.7952

[Moradorin.6217]

2 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

OK ... that doesn't really matter. I get you want to have a couple rounds with Anet directly about this but ... why would they talk about that in a patch note where there isn't any changes for it? That doesn't make sense. 

CMC mentioned Mirage's other dodge in the stream when they announced Vind's added 2nd dodge. So it seems like they should have given an update if they had any actual plan or intention to follow through. That is why.

 

Mind you this was last year many patches ago at this point. they have had time.

Edited February 19, 2023 by Moradorin.6217

[Obtena.7952]

8 minutes ago, Moradorin.6217 said:

CMC mentioned Mirage's other dodge in the stream when they announced Vind's added 2nd dodge. So it seems like they should have given an update if they had any actual plan or intention to follow through. That is why.

OK that's nice ... but again, they didn't make a change to anything about Mirage dodge in the patch ... why would they talk about it in the patch notes?  That doesn't make sense. The patch notes aren't a narrative about what they aren't doing in the patch. 

Edited February 19, 2023 by Obtena.7952

[Zzik.5873]

All I want is they give us back the 3x burst animation on engi rifle, this new one is badly made and feel amateur. Also 3sec stealh on 60 sec cooldown for an elite skill... really? Its worst than racial skill... Can we have the bubble that fellow us around like it was before?

[Acanthus.8120]

18 hours ago, shrew.3059 said:

For every grievance you have, there is likely another grievance that would be created by just doing exactly what you think needs to be done. That doesn't make you wrong, it just makes feedbacj tricky.

While customer feedback is important, running design like an informal democracy of the loudest aggrieved forum member is not a good strategy. No successful company is run like this. That's not how feedback works, unless you're comfortable with being held personally accountable if your suggestion fails spectacularly?

Look, I don't care if you disagree with me and want to talk about where I'm wrong, but you're going to have to at least actually argue against what I actually said for me to actually engage in a conversation about it. Not only did I not say that, even by implication, I did not suggest solutions at all. I explained the general importance of feedback, actions and motivations, gave examples, then gave my opinion of the overall situation of the example as an outsider empathizing with the affected players and why I would feel that way. Frankly, this level of strawman is kind of insulting.

Edited February 20, 2023 by Acanthus.8120

[shrew.3059]

6 hours ago, Acanthus.8120 said:

Look, I don't care if you disagree with me and want to talk about where I'm wrong, but you're going to have to at least actually argue against what I actually said for me to actually engage in a conversation about it. Not only did I not say that, even by implication, I did not suggest solutions at all. I explained the general importance of feedback, actions and motivations, gave examples, then gave my opinion of the overall situation of the example as an outsider empathizing with the affected players and why I would feel that way. Frankly, this level of strawman is kind of insulting.

 

I’m responding to the idea that if people don’t feel heard they are more likely to quit. This may in fact be true, but it’s a consequence of people feeling like they have a seat at the table when it comes to design and that’s not how it works. This belief sets unreasonable expectations. Maybe ANet is partly responsible for setting these expectations, I couldn’t really say.

Is feedback important for software development? Of course. Is communication important for customer relations? Of course. Does feedback imply users will get what they want? Of course not. Are developers under any obligation to provide a response to feedback in order for people to understand what was considered and what the methodology was used. Of course not.

My point was simply: vocal users getting what they want does not necessarily mean a better game or healthier population. People threatening to quit if their feedback isn’t implemented, or if they don’t feel like it was considered, is a weird way to look at product development and frankly sounds like the view fuelled by ignorance of the product design process. I don’t want a product designed by the players of GW2 based on their experiences with the game, I want a product designed by ANet (until I don’t).

Maybe you feel none of this has to do with your point, which is fair and you are free to ignore it if so. Sorry if it’s tangential.

Note: some companies are better at setting/managing user expectations, or of appealing to their users for feedback, and ANet could definitely use improvements in this area.

[Acanthus.8120]

2 hours ago, shrew.3059 said:

 

I’m responding to the idea that if people don’t feel heard they are more likely to quit. This may in fact be true, but it’s a consequence of people feeling like they have a seat at the table when it comes to design and that’s not how it works. This belief sets unreasonable expectations. Maybe ANet is partly responsible for setting these expectations, I couldn’t really say.

Is feedback important for software development? Of course. Is communication important for customer relations? Of course. Does feedback imply users will get what they want? Of course not. Are developers under any obligation to provide a response to feedback in order for people to understand what was considered and what the methodology was used. Of course not.

My point was simply: vocal users getting what they want does not necessarily mean a better game or healthier population. People threatening to quit if their feedback isn’t implemented, or if they don’t feel like it was considered, is a weird way to look at product development and frankly sounds like the view fuelled by ignorance of the product design process. I don’t want a product designed by the players of GW2 based on their experiences with the game, I want a product designed by ANet (until I don’t).

Maybe you feel none of this has to do with your point, which is fair and you are free to ignore it if so. Sorry if it’s tangential.

Note: some companies are better at setting/managing user expectations, or of appealing to their users for feedback, and ANet could definitely use improvements in this area.

I just want Anet to engage in discourse with us, dude. They don't have to say "yes". I just want to know what they (individually or as a company) think.